Allright, github then! 
I was thinking of Project planning for developers (aka “github issues”)
@Larsa, you right…
(ignoring platform)
Something like
RouterOS / Releases / v6 / 6.48.6 Release Notes
Detailed Changes (renamed, added or removed commands, fields, etc.)
Known Bugs
Known Limits
Temporary Walkthroughs
User Reports
Open Tickets
… … … / 6.49.6 Release Notes
…
…
…
… … v7 / 7.3 Release Notes
…
…
… … v7b / 7.4b Release Notes
…
…
Esattamente!
@nithinkumar2000 some RADIUS/AAA providers have solved that issue and have successfully even found a way to assign persistent PD when using PPPoE. It’s commercial in nature, but feel free to email me at: darknate34@gmail.com if you’re interested in linking up with the providers.
NDP Proxy/NAT66 breaks IPv6 specs to begin with. Your ISP should deploy IPv6 according to BCOP 690.
It’s not controversial at all. I advocate BCOP 690 and minimum /56s to LAN side of the smallest customer sites. But /128 address assignment (not delegation, delegation is LAN prefix) would be useful for stateful DHCPv6 management of host addressing.
I would very much like dedicated forum section for reporting bugs that someone from MikroTik would watch. Or maybe public bug tracker.
Now if ten people find same bug and report it to support, it’s not ideal. For support it means handling ten reports, extra work. And not everyone is good with reporting bugs, or maybe the bug is not that clear, so someone may describe some symptoms, but it won’t be complete. And everyone can do it in different way. So it’s even more work for support to read and understand all that, to even figure out that it’s related, and to put the pieces together. If those users would team up, everyone could chip in and they could more easily come up with ways how to reproduce it. Or perhaps find out that it’s actually not a bug. And then there’s everyone else who could be warned in advance.
Of course the problem is that such section could easily end up full of vague or invalid reports, useless +1s, etc. So maybe not this, but I’m sure that some improvement is possible.
You don’t mean the new docs, do you? Because I don’t know if it’s just me, but I can’t seem to find anything there. I like the old manual, where I can see everything nicely sorted by menu, much better.
Concur that a public bug tracker aka GitHub Issues or similar would be very useful.
Regarding the help docs I agree the old start (index) page is better but MT is able to do the exact same thing with the new help docs using any of the platforms Jira or Confluence. Give them a hint.
I myself is a pure googe kind thus I only make use of the search function whenever I need to lookup something.
I agree with that! I am often amazed that they want you to report issues in their bug tracking system, when that system is not public.
A forum is not good for tracking bugs, but at least it offers mutual readability of other people’s reports. When we had no reports on the forum, we would never know that some people put their 3011 in bootloop by simply installing a 7.x stable version, until suddenly a 7.x.1 appears with an “improved stability on 3011 when SFP is present” change note!
At least when there is public reporting of bugs in a forum, people can defer updates in such situations. Maybe not what MikroTik likes, but certainly what I like.
(not that I would even CONSIDER to install a “7.x stable” version on my routers, especially in critical use. let them make the .2 or .3 first)
can you provide smaller packages for wifi2, this will increase the number of people that can test it and provide more feedback, my mikrotik does have 256m ram but 16m hd
@Spirch, what request is this?
In your opinion what should be removed to reduce the package?
The drivers?
The WPA3?
What do they purposely put useless to increase the size, in your opinion?
@rextended
It’s a simple request to make packages smaller or maybe bringing back modularity as in v6.
Decision of mounting 16M HD in router was a BIG mistake which implies now a lot of problems for users.
It’s not our fault that we are now not able to even upgrade quite new devices without some "dances with shamanic drums around the fireplace’
@BartoszP, the user do not request the possibility to do not install other packages, but reduce one specific package on size…
And what .... ? The problem is real no matter what module we talk about as It's impossible to easily upgrade all these tiny in HD space devices.
We are talking about two different things, the user is interested in using the wifiwave2 package on a device (unspecified)
probably not supported by the package itself, and ask to reduce in size the package…
Instead you are talking about something, in which I still fully agree, about the limited space,
and it would be better to make the optional packages as before, or at least integrate only those actually needed.
It is also better to have at least 256M of NAND in future products (no Flash …)
There’s quite a few Chateau owners who would happily test a wifiwave2 driver bundled with the main .npk instead of the usual WiFi implementation.
Anyone else finding 7.4 perfectly stable compared to 7.3?
The thing is that the wifiwave2 package contains drivers for multiple wireless chip families, and if always only the one needed for a particular RouterBoard model was installed, less disk space would be required. But Wave 2 also requires a lot of RAM to model the wireless environment, so RAM size below 128 MB is also disqualifying (as RouterOS itself also needs some RAM). So apart from some "lucky" series of hAP ac² that had 256 MB RAM, I'm not aware of any devices where the flash size alone would prevent Wave 2 from running.
Wifi2 package contains driver for only 2 wifi chip: IPQ4019 and QCA9984.
It requires 14Mb of additional space… further the space required for routeros (12Mb).
It’s a pity that year ago, Mikrotik, did not choose to upgrade at least to 32Mb of nand.
I use a Chateau with an external AP (non mikrotik) to have better wifi performance.
I hope in future Routeros will have some trick to load/install driver on a USB storage ! I think this can be made…
Hi Dear RouterOS Team
please add ZTE MF79U LTE USB Dongle Support
it is just only available lte dongle in my city
thanks
https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/ZTE-MF79-MF79U-4G-LTE-WiFi_1600160385652.html
A Branding Kit package should let you replace any file, so theoretically this should be possible. Now what file path to use, that I don’t dunno.